August 21, 1866. ] 



JOUKNA.L OF HOKTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 



153 



should never have been excluded from tho prize list, except at 

 the two or three shows I mention '.' 



Many years ago, in my early Brahma days, I asked the judge 

 of an exhibition why ho had not awarded a prize in a single 

 cock Brahma class, where a friend of mine and I were the 

 only exhibitors, llo replied, tho one bird was poorly feathered, 

 and the other (mine) lint a peitcomb, which lie considered in- 

 correct. Where is that judge's opinion now? Does anyone 

 hold it ? Is tho hock a parallel case ? 



Our Editors' note to " Jcstitia's " letter, which appears in 

 the same Number, I cannot quite pass over. No one can 

 accuse me of slighting my favourite breed ; through the bygone 

 years of evil report and scandal that attached to their origin, 

 their good qualities made them my favourites ; I will not desert 

 them now, when I so constantly read that at such an exhibition 

 the Brahma class, which I have lived to see added to almost 

 every meeting of importance, was without exception the class 

 of the show. With the greatest deference to our Editors' 

 opinion, I do not see how Brahmas can expect two classes 

 (according to hock feathers). Funds would not permit it, and 

 at many exhibitions they are already divided into dark and 

 light. If granted to Brahmas, why rot to Cochins ? Rather, I 

 would say, let the " Judge " give up his opinion ; he may still 

 hold it, but there is no reason that he should judge by it. Let 

 him award the prizes irrespective of moderate vulture hock, 

 and I am quite sure our coverel-hock birds will beat their 

 naked brethren out of the field. 



One more word to my brother exhibitors. I am one of those 

 who think that with the general run of honourable judges 

 that we have, exhibitors should know who are to be the judges 

 of the exhibition to which they send their specimens. It would 

 then rest with them to decide whether they would send their 

 specimens to bo certainlj' defeated, thus throwing away their 

 entrance money, increasing railway revenue, but receiving no 

 kind feeling in return, and injuring their specimens. By 

 watching the names of the judges wheie they show, they will 

 find out the fancies of each and act accordingly. They can 

 enter their specimens with the reservation that the entrance is 

 only to be paid if Mr. So-aud-So do not award the honours. 

 — Y. B. A. Z. 



As the originator of the discussion on the vulture hock in 

 Cochins and Brahmas, which was carried on in your Journal 

 last spring, may I bo permitted to make a few remarks on the 

 same subject on the occasion of its revival ? I wrote in the first 

 instance as an inquirer, not prepared to find that opinions so 

 diametrically opposed to one another existed on a question 

 which surely ought to be decided either one way or the other. 

 Consequently, I was prepared to give the subject an impartial 

 consideration. I will now venture to lay before you, with all 

 deference to those more experienced breeders and exhibitors, 

 who have far more right to be heard than I can claim, the 

 results at which I arrived. I will endeavour to state these as 

 briefly as possible. They may be summed up as follows : — 



1st, A want of agreement among Judges. 



2nd, The want of a better understanding between Judges and 

 exhibitors, for which the former are to blame. 



3rd, A want of a clear and unmistakeable definition of the 

 " vulture hock." 



Respecting the first of these, I have gathered from the corre- 

 spondence that it exists. I need say no more. Respecting the 

 second, I say advisedly, that " the former are to blame." No 

 impartial critic, weighing well the correspondence in your pages, 

 could arrive at any other conclusion than that, while on the 

 part of breeders and exhibitors there was every wish to state 

 not merely their opinions, but also their reasons, at once as 

 distinctly and as courteously as possible, on the part of judges 

 no corresponding courtesy was shown. If I remember rightly, 

 a few brief words of reply from one judge, based, as was shown 

 by succeeding correspondents, on a mistake, but, nevertheless, 

 repeated, apparently by the same judge, in your last week's 

 impression, formed the only notice taken by that body of the 

 discussion. This treatment speaks for itself, and, therefore, 

 on my second conclusion also I need say no more, but will at 

 once go on to make a few remarks on my third conclusion — 

 viz., that we need a clear and unmistakeable definition of the 

 vulture hock. Here, too, I feel sure that judges and exhibitors 

 ought to be agreed, though from the silence of the former we 

 might almost argue that they are of a different opinion. Is it 

 possible, that for the sake of exercising a little arbitrary power, 

 with the love of which one has been accustomed to associate a 

 certain amount of narrow-mindedness, those judges (for, of 



course, I allude only to them), who are sworn enemies of the 

 vulture hock, keep us in the dark as to which birds they con- 

 sider and which they do not consider to bo thus disqualified? 



It appears to me ihat this question would be best settled by 

 a certain amount of compromise. I have gathered that exhi- 

 bitors are agreed that there are at all events two different de- 

 velopments which go by the name of tho vulture hock. These 

 are — 1st, the vulture hock 'proper, where stiff, straight quill 

 feathors project from the hock ; 2nd, the vulture lioch simulative 

 (if I may be allowed the expression), where the soft fluffy 

 feathers of the leg — which I hope wo are all agreed cannot be 

 too abundant — owing to their very luxuriance project a littlo 

 beyond the hock, sometimes curving towards it, sometimes 

 assuming a more pointed appearance. Now, the compromise 

 which I have to suggest is as follows : Let judges give us some 

 assurance that they will restrict their definition of the vulture 

 hock to the first of these — the vulture hock proper; and I feel 

 sure that breeders in general would he willing for them to go 

 even beyond the dictum of the Poultry Club, and consider it 

 not only an objection, but also an absolute disqualification, on 

 the distinct understanding that what I have termed the vulture 

 hock simulative be regarded not only as no disqualification, but 

 on the contrary as an exuberance of beauty. 



I could not but regret to find that one whom you describe as 

 an able judge bases his condemnation on the fact that the 

 originally imported Cochins were not vulture-hocked. Have 

 the imported birds been always the best specimens of their 

 kind ? On the contrary, have not careful breeding and match- 

 ing developed in almost every imported breed qualities nascent 

 only in the originals ? Does not the case of wild flowers under 

 cultivation, in their tendency to become double, form a fair 

 parallel ? If so, why should we in our greenhouses and gardens 

 rejoice over it, hut in our poultry yards condemn it ? 



I will now, lest you should think that I have exceeded all 

 bounds in the length of these remarks, leave the suggestions 

 which I have thrown out for the consideration of others ; ven- 

 turing only in conclusion most respectfully to invite the judges 

 of poultry to declare their opinions on the subject, as well as 

 to seek to arrive among themselves at some consistent and 

 unanimous opinion, thereby securing at once tho increased 

 confidence and the sincere gratitude of every breeder and ex- 

 hibitor. — Clep.icus. 



CRAVEN AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY'S TOULTRY 

 SHOW. 



The twelfth annual meeting of this Society was held at Skipton ou 

 Friday tho 17th inst. 



The display of poultry was good, and the number of entries large t 

 hut from the advanced state of moulting in which the adult birds at 

 present are, these were extremely ditheult to judge. The great attrac- 

 tion of the Show was the chickens of this year, in almost every 

 class of which there were some most beautiful specimens. The 

 Pigeons were also numerous, and of excellent quality. The following 

 prizes were awarded : — 



Dorking (Any colour).— First, H. Beldnn, Goitstock,Bingley. Second, 

 J. Pindar, Clitheroe. Commended, T. Briden, Etirby. Chickens.— First, 

 A. Fentou, Rochdale. Second, J. Stott, Healey, near Rochdale. Com- 

 mended, H. Beldon. 



Spanish (Black).— First, H. Beld »n. Second, J. Tbresb, Bradford. 

 Commended. J. Newton. Silsden. Chickens. — First, J. Pinder. Second, 

 J. Newton. Commended, H. Beldon ; II. Pickles, jun., Enrby. 



liAME- First, H. Beldon. Second, J. D. Newsome, Batley. Chickens. 

 — First, J. Carlisle, Earby. Second, W. Turner, Earby. Commended, 

 J. D. Newsome. 



Cochin-China.— First, H. Beldon. Second, C. Sidgwick, Keiffhlev. 

 Cliickens. — First, A. Fenton. Second, C. Sidgwick. Commended, J. 

 Stott. 



Hamburgh (Golden-pencilled).— First, H. Pickles, jun. Second, S. Smith, 

 Northowram, Halifax. Commended, H. Beldon. Chickens. — First, S. 

 Smith. Second, H. Beldon. 



Hamburgh or Chittepratt (Silver-pencilled). — First, H. Pickles, jun. 

 Second, H. Beldon. Chickens. — First, H. Beldon. Second, W. Bairstow, 

 Fearn Cliffe, Bingley. Commended, H. Picklen, jun. 



Hamburgh (Golden-spangled .—First, W. Throup, Silsden. Second, 

 J. W. Cannan, Bradford. Commended, H. Pickles, jun. Chickens. — 

 First, J, W. Cannan. Second, W. Throup. 



Hamburgh (Silver-spangled).— First, H. Pickles, jun. Second, H. Bel- 

 don. (hir/.t'iis.— First, H. Beldon. Second, J. Preston, Allcrton, Brad- 

 ford. Commended, H. Pickles, jun. 



Haitburgh (Black 1 . — First, H. Beldon. Second, C. Sidgwick. Chickens. 

 — First and Second, C. Sidgwick. Coumended, H. Beldon. 



Poland. — First and Second, H. Beldon. Chickens*— First, H. Beldon. 

 Second, P. Unsworth. Lowton, near Golbornc, Lancashire. 



Game Bantam. — First and Second, J. W. Caiman. Chickens. — First, 

 J. D. Newsome. Second, J. W. Cnnnau. 



Bantam (Any colour).— First, E. Hutton, PudBey. Second, J. W. Caa- 

 nnn. Chicken*.— First, H. Beldon. Second, E. Hutton. 



Any other Variety.— First, H. Beldon. Second, W. Culshaw, Skip- 



